The subject of a criminal history record sealed or expunged under this section or under other provisions of law, including former s. 893.14, former s. 901.33, and former s. 943.058, may lawfully deny or fail to acknowledge the arrests covered by the sealed or expunged record, except when the subject of the record:

1. Is a candidate for employment with a criminal justice agency;

2. Is a defendant in a criminal prosecution;

3. Concurrently or subsequently petitions for relief under section 943.0585 or section 943.059;

4. Is a candidate for admission to The Florida Bar;

5. Is seeking to be employed or licensed by or to contract with the Department of Children and Family Services or the Department of Juvenile Justice or to be employed or used by such contractor or licensee in a sensitive position having direct contact with children, the developmentally disabled, the aged, or the elderly as provided in s. 110.1127(3), s. 393.063(15), s. 394.4572(1), s. 397.451, s. 402.302(3), s. 402.313(3), s. 409.175(2)(i), s. 415.102(4), s. 415.103, s. 916.106(10) and (13) s. 985.407, or chapter 400; or

6. Is seeking to be employed or licensed by the Department of Education, any district school board, any university laboratory school, any charter school, any private or parochial school or any local governmental entity that licenses child care facilities.

7. Is attempting to purchase a firearm from a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer and is subject to a criminal history background check under state or federal law; or

8. Is seeking authorization from a Florida seaport identified in s. 311.09 for employment within or access to one or more of such seaports pursuant to s. 311.12 or s. 311.125.

When the record is expunged the agency will only receive the subject's demographic information and a caveat statement stating that criminal history information has been expunged, but will be unable to receive the details.

You do not have to talk about expunged records, in Florida (because that's what we have with us, it may be different in other states), on your law school application. There are 8 exceptions to this rule. 1 is the Bar exam. Applying to law school - or any other type of school - isn't.

As the agitator showed us, YOU ARE LEGALLY ALLOWED TO DENY THE ARREST (in Florida) unless you are an APPLICANT TO THE BAR.

Wow. You are borderline retarded.

Holly, the bitter/mean/rude schtick might work a bit better elsewhere. The point people are making is that there's usually no reason not to disclose, as minor stuff rarely impacts admissions. If a C&F committee decides that you're being misleading, or just gets a funny feeling, you might be in a lot of trouble over something that wouldn't have really mattered in the first place. At minimum, you might get a headache you don't need.

You guys are idiots. Holly is 100% correct, you're not listening what she's saying.

The bar app and the law school admissions app are compeltely different things. I don't know about all other states because my crime happened in CA. But I talked to a lawyer in CA and the advice he gave was that under Cali Penal Code 1203.4a, "the defendant, who shall thereafter be released from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense of which he or she has been convicted". Which he interpeted as that I have been released from ALL PENALTIES AND DISABILITES. Disclosing this on a law school admissions app is a disability. My lawyer also said that EVEN in the case of one law school app that explicilty says to disclose even expunged records, I was not legally bound to do so. Of course he also said I should, ethics and all....which I will do by an addmendment letter to the law school. We will see if they retract my acceptance offer.

Now the state bar is a different story. NY bar requires it, CA bar explicitly says NOT to disclose expunged records.

"The Illinois Supreme Court mandates that law school graduates seeking to be licensed in Illinois disclose all criminal cases in which they have been charged, even if the matter has been expunged, said Joe Tybor, spokesman for the high court."

In New Jersey:"If you apply for admission to a school (except law school) or a professional organization, the expungement is completely effective: You need not recite matters that have been expunged."-from Allan Marain, a New Jersey attorney who specializes in expungement

The Illinois Supreme court example: LAW SCHOOL GRADUATESNew Jersey: THAT IS A RANDOM ATTORNEY! Many people believe that you HAVE to when you don\'t. That is an opinion (likely wrong, like yours). Please show me ONE example where someone was reprimanded or denied admission because they omitted an expunged record.

Here's another wrong opinion from Barbara Andelman, asst. dean at Case Western

The questions vary widely from school to school. For example, the question on our application specifically states that expunged offenses must be disclosed. Another school may specifically exempt such matters. Precise reading of the questions on the application is a must.

Students will often seek advice from an attorney on whether an expunged matter needs to be disclosed and are told incorrectly that they need not disclose expunged offenses. Although this is true, for example, in the employment context, it is not true in the context of applying for admission to a school.

The effect on an applicant’s chances for admission based on disclosure of the offense is almost never as bad as the repercussions for failing to disclose. So I always advise folks: read the question carefully and respond honestly. (I’m the person at my school who signs off on our graduates’ character and fitness certificates for the bar exam, and every year I have graduating third-years who failed to disclose a matter that would have had no impact on our decision to admit them, but whose ability to take the bar exam is in jeopardy because of their decision not to disclose.)

and another from UMD:

It is better to answer the question honestly, even if the charge or arrest has been expunged. You should explain the circumstances surrounding the incident and discuss what you have learned from the experience.

and another from Dartmouth:

Applicants who answer "yes" to any such question should meet with a pre-law advisor and include an addendum with their applications. This document should describe and take full responsibility for the incident. Failure to disclose is considered misconduct and can result in expulsion from law school, refusal of an application to take the bar exam, or even subsequent disbarment.

and another from University of Arkansas:

What if I was found not guilty, charges were dropped or the record expunged?Regardless of the action taken to end the charges, you must still disclose thisinformation. In the application process, you will be given a chance to explain theoutcome of the case or charges.

and another from Indiana University:

You must attach a statement of explanation, giving full details, including the facts and the disposition. This explanation must also include details of incidents that have been expunged from your record. If you were advised by counsel to not disclose information on an employment application, it must be disclosed on your law school application.

and another from the University of Kentucky:

What are Character and Fitness questions and how should they be answered?

A. Law schools are interested in each candidate's "character and fitness" to practice law because new law graduates must pass the character and fitness requirements of a particular state's Board of Bar Examiners before being permitted to sit for the bar examination. For that reason, law school applications ask about prior disciplinary proceedings in college, prior arrests or convictions, and other questions that bear on the candidate's moral character, reputation for truthfulness, etc. When answering these questions, be as complete and accurate as you can, and take responsibility for any prior mistakes (don't blame your friends for a DUI arrest or your professor for an academic disciplinary problem, for example). Keep in mind that when you are a third-year student, your law school will be providing your application to the bar authorities for the state where you have chosen to sit for the bar, and the bar will investigate any discrepancies between the character and fitness answers on your law school application and your bar application. Few acts you have committed will be serious enough to keep you out of law school, but a lack of candor on the application can be a very serious matter indeed when it is time to sit for the bar. And keep in mind your duty to update your application, both after it is submitted and during your time as a law student. Also, any attorney who tells you not to report something because it was expunged or for other reasons is giving you bad advice. In this process your candor in answering is more important than the answer in almost all cases.

Last edited by brizz9 on Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.

HA! You quoted a Dean at a law school? It also mentions NOTHING about an expunged record. Nothing. Nada. Zip. You can respond honestly by not saying ANYTHING because most states (like Florida) allow you to completely deny any expunged arrest on a law school application.

The second quote says it is better. I would probably agree. There is no mandate there.

The third, again, says absolutely nothing about an expunged record. What the hell is your point? We are not talking about non-expunged crimes.

Oh, and as to your other quotes, they mean NOTHING. Many schools tell you that you HAVE to tell them about expunged crimes. That is the whole fucking point of this thread - the school is lying. You are under no legal obligation to do so.

Law schools also tell you that their salary data is accurate and the job prospects for fourth tier students are good.

Holly, you must be real popular at the water cooler. Your ability to be civil stuns the masses. I get it: you disagree. Cool. The point is that the character and fitness portion of the bar is not an objective process: it is a subjective evaluation, and anything you do to cast doubt on your willingness to be forthright with the committee could have a significant negative impact on your admission to the bar. There is almost nothing you can do that just closes the bar for life: everything else is subjective, and your argument doesn't acknowledge this at all.

Holly wrote:Oh, and as to your other quotes, they mean NOTHING. Many schools tell you that you HAVE to tell them about expunged crimes. That is the whole fucking point of this thread - the school is lying. You are under no legal obligation to do so.

Law schools also tell you that their salary data is accurate and the job prospects for fourth tier students are good.

And here's an example of the question that an assistant dean will be asked to answer on the Character & Fitness questionnaire:

That the responses to the following questions concerning the Applicant’s character and fitness to practice law are true and correct based on my review of Law School files or my firsthand knowledge. For all questions that I have answered in the affirmative, I have provided an explanation, including the outcome or resolution of any charge or investigation, in the space provided at the end of each section, or on a separate sheet, attached.

which would include the expunged question.

Of course, if you'd rather listen to someone calling people retards on the internet, and not to the people who will be filling out the Character & Fitness questionnaire when you apply to the Bar, go right ahead.

Last edited by brizz9 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Holly's attitude aside, I've been searching for an hour to find some snippet of statute, from any state, that agrees with the position that you may be required to disclose this information.

I have found some states that explicitly give you the right to answer "no," and though my brain is fried and I'm currently at work, I imagine it possible that if a state doesn't give you the explicit right to deny the conviction, then you have not been given permission to deny it on the law school application.

But seriously, I can't think of a good reason to listen to me. I'm not even a 0L yet.

Holly wrote:HA! You quoted a Dean at a law school? It also mentions NOTHING about an expunged record. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

And, in addition, the school can revoke your JD for not being truthful on your law school application. But again, if you feel like spending $150,000 to find out whether you should or shouldn't disclose an expunged record, go right ahead.

I posted a few links to cases where people were denied based on "lying on their application" about 3-4 months ago. If you dig back far enough I'm sure you can find them.

Pyke and I had this debate. The summary of the argument was that the statutes in most states give an exception to expungment for application to the bar. Because your law school application is a required submission in your application to the board of legal examiners, courts have interpreted state statutes to treat your law school application in the same manner as one would an application to the bar.

paul1454 wrote:I posted a few links to cases where people were denied based on "lying on their application" about 3-4 months ago. If you dig back far enough I'm sure you can find them.

Pyke and I had this debate. The summary of the argument was that the statutes in most states give an exception to expungment for application to the bar. Because your law school application is a required submission in your application to the board of legal examiners, courts have interpreted state statutes to treat your law school application in the same manner as one would an application to the bar.

Feel free to disagree Holly, I'm sure you will.

...

Last edited by brizz9 on Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

paul1454 wrote:I posted a few links to cases where people were denied based on "lying on their application" about 3-4 months ago. If you dig back far enough I'm sure you can find them.

Pyke and I had this debate. The summary of the argument was that the statutes in most states give an exception to expungment for application to the bar. Because your law school application is a required submission in your application to the board of legal examiners, courts have interpreted state statutes to treat your law school application in the same manner as one would an application to the bar.

Feel free to disagree Holly, I'm sure you will.

Retard.

WTF?

[For the record brit, I am agreeing with you]

Last edited by orangeswarm on Mon Feb 25, 2008 9:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

paul1454 wrote:I posted a few links to cases where people were denied based on "lying on their application" about 3-4 months ago. If you dig back far enough I'm sure you can find them.

Pyke and I had this debate. The summary of the argument was that the statutes in most states give an exception to expungment for application to the bar. Because your law school application is a required submission in your application to the board of legal examiners, courts have interpreted state statutes to treat your law school application in the same manner as one would an application to the bar.

Feel free to disagree Holly, I'm sure you will.

Retard.

WTF?

Sorry, that was a joke. Holly has called me a retard about 25 times in this thread.

Yes, your post contains exactly my thoughts on the issue Paul. Also, I don't think you should be required to disclose expunged records, or that you should be asked about expunged records in the bar application, but since you are and your law application could be part of that, that you should.

Since you don't believe anyone, here is one example of what a two second lexis search would turn up if you would stop arguing and actually do some research:

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF EMSEAN L. BROWN FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF MARYLAND

Misc. Docket No. 10, September Term, 2005

COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND

392 Md. 44; 895 A.2d 1050; 2006 Md. LEXIS 176

April 11, 2006, Filed

CASE SUMMARYPROCEDURAL POSTURE: Petition applicant sought admission to the Maryland Bar. Respondent, the State Board of Law Examiners, forwarded the application of the applicant to the Character Committee, pursuant to Md. R. Admis. Bar 5(b)(1), after the applicant disclosed on his application that he was convicted of bank fraud and had failed to affirmatively answer a question on his law school application regarding whether he had ever been convicted.

OVERVIEW: The applicant was convicted of bank fraud in 1991, was incarcerated, and was ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $ 14,250. The applicant had been employed at the bank wherein he engaged in a scheme with a non-employee wherein the applicant provided customer information to the non-employee, who gained access to monies from customers' accounts totally $ 14,250. When the applicant applied to law school, he marked "No" on his application to the questions of whether he had been charged, arrested, or convicted of any crime and whether he had ever been terminated from employment. The applicant said he responded negatively to the crime question because he thought that his conviction had been expunged. The court held that the applicant failed to meet his burden of proving that he was fully and completely rehabilitated in a manner that showed he possessed the good moral character and fitness required for admission to the Bar.